Trans celebrities and activists vow to defy Supreme Court ruling
Transgender celebrities and activists have vowed to defy the Supreme Court's gender judgment by ignoring any new rules on single-sex bathrooms that are introduced as a result. The finding that the definition of a woman in equality law is based on biological sex means trans women with a gender recognition certificate (GRC) can be excluded from single-sex spaces if deemed 'proportionate'. Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) chairwoman Baroness Kishwer Falkner has described the judgment as 'enormously consequential' and promised to pursue organisations which do not update their policies. But it provoked a furious reaction from trans influencers, who vowed to continue using single-sex bathrooms, while Married at First Sight star Ella Morgan declared, 'I still myself as a woman, whether I am on paper or not'.The 31-year-old claimed that trans people are now bearing the brunt of the damage caused by the likes of rapist Isla Bryson.'I hate to say this, but for the first time since I have had that title and role I actually do feel nervous and scared not only for myself but for the community because it's the unknown,' she told Good Morning Britain.Ant Lexa, who plays Abbi Montgomery in Netflix series Sex Education, described feeling 'heartbroken', while former Labour MSP candidate Heather Herbert claimed trans people are now 'under attack'.Meanwhile, trans influencers railed against the judgment on social media by posting videos of their horrified reactions, with one - Bel Priestly - telling her 1.4million followers that Britain was 'going backwards'. Married At First Sight trans star Ella Morgan said she feels 'scared' and 'nervous' after the Supreme Court 's landmark gender ruling Ant Lexa, who plays Abbi Montgomery in Netflix series Sex Education, described feeling 'heartbroken' Sex Education star Ant Lexa is one of the most prominent public figures to have spoken out against the judgment. 'Getting myself out of bed this morning was hard after receiving this news,' she told Channel 4 News. 'I am, first and foremost, a woman. That doesn't feel like some political stance. It just feels like who I am. And it has always felt like who I am. 'So not being recognised within law, especially a law that is designed to protect us, and that was why it was there, just feels terrifying. 'Not even about today, but the precedent that it's setting for not just the UK, but across the world. It just has left me feeling unprotected.'Meanwhile, former politician Heather Herbert claimed the UK was 'following in the footsteps of Trump's America'. 'Obviously I'm disappointed, no judge can tell me who I am.,' she told the BBC.'If a judge was to tell you that you're not a woman, that you're a man, it wouldn't change who you are, it wouldn't change how you feel.' She claimed that the ruling was part of a trend for 'attacking minorities', citing ethnic minorities and people with disabilities as previous targets. Trans influencers, including Bel Priestley (left) and a trans man called Ben with the handle @benj_99, voiced their opposition to the ruling with posts on social media One trans influencer, Jaycee, suggested the ruling would have unforeseen consequences Heather Herbert, a trans campaigner and former Labour MSP candidate, claimed her community were 'under attack' The negative reaction from trans activists contrasted with the joyous response of women's rights campaigners - pictured outside the Supreme Court on Wednesday Read More JK Rowling clashes with trans activist doctor as she leads calls for PM to break silence on ruling On social media, the decision sparked ire from trans influencer Ruby Forrest, who claimed it was 'disgustingly discriminatory'. 'It disproportionately affects transgender women who do not have the means to medically transition,' Forrest said. 'It also allows for the government to implant laws that further discriminate against transgender women.'And if I am forced to search for mental health services or recovery clinics as a man, this disproportionately increases my chances of being assaulted and being murdered.'Another TikTok user, Alexis Blake, insisted the ruling 'would not help anyone'. 'I am tired of paying the price for men's s*** behaviour time and time again,' Blake said. 'I had to prove myself time and time again to get my gender recognition certificate, to now be told I am not legally recognised as a woman.'I am getting married this summer and I don't know whether I am getting legally married as a man or a woman, which really sucks.'They want us to use toilets that align with our biological sex, so trans men look very much like men.' Another TikTok user, Alexis Blake, insisted the ruling 'would not help anyone' TikTok influencer Ruby Forrest suggested the ruling was 'disgustingly discriminatory' TikToker @witchoteast, a trans woman, said that as a protest she would not be 'visiting all the men's bathrooms. 'It will be interesting to see what all the guys have got to offer,' she said. 'We'll hang out and have a little party and have a great time together. I'm excited. So well done.'Meanwhile @transmatters promised to 'never stop fighting'.'Write to your MPs, make some noise and don't let them beat you down,' the influencer said. The ruling by the UK's highest court on Wednesday found that the definition of a woman in equality law is based on biological sex. The court ruled that the words 'sex', 'man' and 'woman' in the Equality Act must mean 'biological sex', rejecting any alternative interpretations as 'incoherence and impracticable'.In handing down the court's judgement, Lord Hodge said he recognised 'the strength of feeling on both sides' and cautioned against seeing the judgment as a triumph for one side over another, stressing that the law still gives trans people protection against discrimination. He said: 'The unanimous decision of this court is that the terms 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to biological woman and biological sex. 'In a judgement written by Lady Rose, Lady Simler and myself, with whom Lord Reed and Lord Lloyd-Jones agree, we unanimously allow the appeal.' TikTok user @witchoteast is planning to visit men's bathrooms to see 'what guys have to offer', while another, @transmatters, vowed to 'never stop fightingLord Hodge added: 'But we counsel against reading this judgement as a triumph for one or more groups in our society at the expense of another. It is not. 'The Equality Act gives transgender people protection not only against discrimination through the protected characteristics of gender reassignment, but also against direct discrimination, indirect discrimination, and harassment, in substance in their acquired gender.'He recognised the 'strength of feeling on all sides' which lies behind the case, adding: 'On the one hand women, who make up one half of the population, have campaigned for over 150 years to have equality with men and to combat discrimination based on their sex. That work still continues.'On the other hand, a vulnerable and often harassed minority, the trans community, struggle against discrimination and prejudice as they seek to live their lives with dignity.'Their ruling also deemed that the certificated sex interpretation would have 'rendered meaningless' a section of the 2010 Equalities Act dealing with protection from discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation.This interpretation would mean 'a trans woman (a biological male) with a GRC (so legally female) who remains sexually oriented to other females would become a same-sex attracted female, in other words, a lesbian' and would lead to an 'inevitable loss of autonomy and dignity for lesbians' as well as impacting lesbian clubs and associations.What does the Supreme Court gender ruling mean? What did the Supreme Court rule?The Supreme Court ruled the terms 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex.What does it mean for single sex spaces? The court's decision will have huge consequences for how single-sex spaces and services operate across the UK, experts said today.The written Supreme Court judgment gives examples including rape or domestic violence counselling, refuges, rape crisis centres, female-only hospital wards and changing rooms. The court ruled that trans women with a gender recognition certificate (GRC) can be excluded from single-sex spaces if 'proportionate'.The government said the ruling 'brings clarity and confidence, for women and service providers such as hospitals, refuges, and sports clubs'.What does it mean for employers?Employment experts say it will provide companies with greater 'clarity' over single sex spaces for their staff.Lara Brown, senior Research Fellow in the Culture and Identity Unit at Policy Exchange, said a trans woman with a GRC who is excluded from single-sex spaces cannot say she is being discriminated against as a woman.She explained: 'This ruling makes it legal for any space that wants to be single sex to exclude biological men.'Could employers still be at risk of discrimination?The Supreme Court made it clear that trans people are protected under the gender reassignment provisions in the Equality Act and will be able to bring claims if they are discriminated or harassed. Experts say a trans woman will be able to bring a sex discrimination claim if they are disadvantaged because they are perceived to be a woman or because they associate with a woman. Rob McKellar, legal services director at Peninsula, said failure to be an inclusive workplace, regardless of any protected characteristics, could result in a discrimination claim. What does the ruling mean for competitive sports?In recent years, many sports have cracked down on rules around transgender athletes at the elite level.Athletics, cycling and aquatics are among those who have banned trans women from taking part in women's events. The UK government said it hopes the decision will provide clarity for sports clubs. Although today's ruling did not concern sport directly, former Olympian Sharron Davies welcomed the decision, saying it was important to 'define what a woman is'.Could a pregnant woman with a GRC be entitled to maternity leave? Experts said today that the ruling that only women can become pregnant shows a trans man (biological woman) would be able to take maternity leave, while a trans woman (biological man) would not. Jo Moseley, an employment law specialist at national law firm Irwin Mitchell, said: 'The Supreme Court acknowledged that only women can become pregnant. Therefore a trans man (a biological woman who identifies as a man) can take maternity leave. 'Had the court reached a different decision, it's possible that trans men with a GRC wouldn't have been entitled to protection in relation to pregnancy under the characteristics of 'pregnancy or maternity'.'
